Valve Starts Publishing Packages For Its Own Linux Distribution

An anonymous reader writes "In preparation for the "Steam Box" game console that will make necessary their own Linux-based software platform, Valve developers have started publishing Debian packages for their platform which looks like their first-generation operating system will be derived from Ubuntu 12.04.2 LTS. So far the packages being published include a new "Plymouth" boot splash screen as the operating system loads, a Steam desktop wallpaper, auto-updating system scripts, and experimental NVIDIA Linux graphics drivers."

Comments

Re:Debian? EWWWWW...

[The MAZZTer]

Steam for Linux only formerly supports Ubuntu 12.04 IIRC. So it makes sense they would base their own distro off of that.

Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nerdfest]

It looks like this might finally be the year. With Windows 8 throwing a lot of users away with a bad interface and a marketplace lock-in, The timing is pretty good. A lot of people always claimed that games were the only reason they were still on Windows.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[nine-times]

Maybe not the year of the Linux desktop, but instead the year of the Linux set-top-box.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Anonymous Coward]

Games on Windows.
Proper CAD software on Windows.
Proper Audio and Video tools on Windows.
Countless proprietary tools that only work on Windows (or even just certain versions of Windows) (especially hw related like firmware updates, bios updates, mcu programmers) ... the list actually goes on and on and on.

Yes i run linux at home, i love it.
Yes i have run some of the stuff above in wine when needed (but the user experience isn't really the same).
No - windows will stay here for a while, it takes more than Windows 8 to get rid of it (especially as ubuntu is also making mistakes on the way).

Btw. if you like valve on linux, use steam like i do.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[jedidiah]

Unless you are really willing to spend $1000 on a software tool, most of what you posted is nonsense.

Games are an interesting problem but that's being addressed by Valve.

Obscure vertical market apps are interesting of course but only for small subsets of the total market of Windows users. For people that don't need to run some sort of office of some particular type, those vertical apps might as well not exist.

That's why you can't name drop any of them, in stark contrast to perhaps to a single video,audio, or CAD tool that costs more than you are willing to spend.

Small business may remain Microsoft's saving grace as end users defect to tablets and larger corporations migrate to platform independent solutions.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Krneki]

Even bigger contributor to Linux gaming is Unity3D.

A lot of new games are developed using this relatively cheap/easy tool to create games, where the community shares free or for a small charge scripts/pre build packages and the game can be compiled for almost every platform.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[telchine]

Maybe not the year of the Linux desktop, but instead the year of the Linux set-top-box.

As long as Valve (and ideally other developers as well) make big-name games availale, then I think a lot of gamers would switch to Linux on their existing computer rather than buy a set-top box.

Plenty of people only use their computers for basic web/email/word processing and games and the only thing that ties them to Windows is games. I'm sure plenty would welcome the opportunity to not have to pay for Windows (or have the hassle of pirating it) so long as the games they want to play are available on Linux.

Unfortunately, right now, the choice is lacking. I see Counter-Strike:Source and Team Fortress 2 being the only big-name games. This is disappointing as they were allegedly beta testing with Left 4 Dead 2 which still isn't available on Linux.

Once the other main Source games become available and new games are written with Linux in mind then I can see adoption of Linux for gaming picking up.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[nine-times]

Yeah, my point was not about the desktop/set-top-box format itself, but about the roles people use computers for. If Valve can get a substantial portion of their games to run on their distribution, then they may very well succeed in bringing Linux to people who use their computers primarily for gaming. And that's no small accomplishment.

However, when it comes to computers used for business/productivity, this probably won't have a big impact. If you could bring Outlook and Adobe CS to Linux, then you might really see something. And no, Thunderbird and GIMP don't count.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[sl4shd0rk]

It looks like this might finally be the year.

That's almost comical because we've been asking ourselves that question for so many years. Valve has got a good thing going, but until we start seeing mainstream games on Steam being released with Linux binaries, all Valve is doing is prolonging another inevitable Fail.

Don't get me wrong, I applaud Valve for what they are doing. It takes a lot of balls to take on the Console/Windows gaming behemoth and I think it takes keen insight to recognize the death of your product coming down the road because your main support platform went full-retard. BUT it doesn't feel good to sit at a Linux Steam console staring at all the cool games for Windows, and 90% of Linux selections are stuff repackaged from the Humble Bundles. When a new game comes out, the people on Linux Steam want to be able to play it too. When the industry gets to that point, the everyday Linux desktop headaches may offset the Windows ones enough to make make "YotLD" viable.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Kardos]

Well we've got linux on server and on mobile, if we get consoles this year, I'll settle for desktop in 2014.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Howitzer86]

I can't help but remain skeptical. So far, the frothing at the mouth against Windows 8 is pretty much just a computer-enthusiast thing and of that group not all are united.

Throwing out ideals such as good and evil, open-source and closed, and good or bad design - it all comes down to: 1) Which OS comes with Average Joe's PC. 2) Which OS runs the apps Average Joe has already. 3)Which interface is less of a pain in the butt to learn for Average Joe.

In that order.

That said, if PC usage continues to decline, the fate of whatever remains of the desktop could be left entirely up to the enthusiast.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[theurge14]

This is a target-specific device (gaming console), not a traditional desktop. It doesn't bring Linux any closer to the desktop than the explosion of Android phones did.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[interval1066]

...only thing that ties them to Windows is games.

That, and the demands of employers. I'm a contractor so I need to keep a Windows machine around to work on their stuff. I do more Windows development than Linux, but its really starting to tip the other way.

I'm sure plenty would welcome the opportunity to not have to pay for Windows (or have the hassle of pirating it)

Its not much of a hassle. Er, so I'm told.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nerdfest]

Valve is heading towards Linux because they see where Microsoft is heading. Microsoft is pulling an Apple style lock - in with the new interface and will slowly remove support for the old one. They don't want to pay the cut of all sales that Microsoft will demand. I'm quite surprised more people haven't realised this ... But perhaps I'm just paranoid.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Omestes]

marketplace lock-in

Huh? What lock-in? Last I checked I could still install software from any source I wanted to, unless this has changed in the last half hour.

. A lot of people always claimed that games were the only reason they were still on Windows.

For me this is still part of the reason I stick with it (the other being some profession software, with no fully comparable Linux peers yet), but sadly even with Steam, Linux isn't there yet. Perhaps we're closer to the day when it is possible for a gamer to switch, which is progress, but we're still probably years off.

What we need is the major publishers to jump on the bandwagon, and not just Valve. We also need some soft of transparent, uber-Wine, so people can run everything else without any fuss or worry.

Right now the Steambox concept is going to make Linux more of a console OS, than the new ascendant desktop. Which is also pretty good progress.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[m.ducharme]

By 2014 the desktop will be a special-purpose device only, with a market consisting mostly of development and server machines (which linux already has a health share of now). No victory there.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Dcnjoe60]

It looks like this might finally be the year. With Windows 8 throwing a lot of users away with a bad interface and a marketplace lock-in, The timing is pretty good. A lot of people always claimed that games were the only reason they were still on Windows.

Games and Office. As good as the linux alternatives are to MS Office, they fall short on the business desktop.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[m.ducharme]

Except server machines are a class of their own, not desktops. Oops. Okay, I'm going to go have some more coffee.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[TrancePhreak]

Which only just recently is getting a Linux port.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Howitzer86]

Depending on what you get, that "CAD" software it can cost even more (~6k for Synchro, which is a 4D BIM/VDC application). What's left unmentioned are the DCC programs used to create content for games. The big companies behind these are slow to port their software to Linux.

That said, I work at a small-medium sized construction company. I know a couple coworkers who have been given Surface Pros (I bought one for myself the day it came out). These tablets are faster than their old computer, and when they get used to using them, just might replace it entirely. As for me, I use CAD/BIM/VDC software on a daily basis, so I work with a Xeon powered Dell Precision T5600. The Surface Pro doesn't replace my computer yet, but maybe one day something like it (but with a docking station) will.

At home I use whatever I use at work. Until Autodesk-and-friends port the software (especially Revit and Navisworks), it will probably continue to be Windows. If it's Windows being used at work, it'll be Windows being used at home for many of us, and Windows at school for students studying ahead of entering the work force. That's just my opinion though. Things can change. I don't really care so long as it doesn't stink.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nerdfest]

I'm fairly sure that you can only install applications in the new Interface through the Microsoft market. I'm also fairly sure that the old interface will disappear. Valve is just a little quicker than most in picking of this up.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[ciderbrew]

A pirate (yar) version of Adobe CS. The underage no money types have to learn how to use your stuff. Investment in future users isn't a lost sale.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Vanderhoth]

I think this is the difference between Windows 8 RT and Windows 8 Pro. Ultimately I think MS will make it so only applications bought through their app store will be installable on windows systems, but to my knowledge they've only done this on Windows 8 RT at the moment. I think they purposely made the naming of Win RT and Win Pro obscure to make it confusing about what people are complaining about when they say, "I couldn't install X on my new windows (RT/PRO) device". That way MS can always come back with, "oh you didn't read the system requirements. That price of software clearly states it's not for (RT/PRO) device".

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[smi.james.th]

I've been sort of forced to use Win8 for the last few weeks on my new laptop (yeah I guess I could probably get it to work with 7 instead, but I'm too lazy...) and to be honest it's really not bad. Once you get used to the different interface it's really no problem.

Also, as far as marketplace lock-in, that's complete rubbish. I've installed all my own applications, haven't had to use a single one from the Windows / Metro thingy, most of the time I don't even realise I'm on a new OS. It's somewhat faster than Win7, though that difference isn't huge.

All that being said, I still prefer Linux, I'm one of those who have specific applications packages for work reasons which have to use Windows. But Win8 isn't the big loss for M$ that you make it out to be.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[jones_supa]

Unity3D has had a Linux engine for quite a while, and that is what the parent comment was talking about: games made using Unity3D get a Linux port "for free".

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[xaxa]

Back in the 1990s AutoDesk released software for other platforms -- I own AutoSketch for the Acorn Archimedes, and Wikipedia suggests that was released on Atari too. It probably won't be fast, and we probably won't hear about it until it's ready, but there's no technical reason AutoDesk must stick to Windows.

(My dad taught engineering drawing in secondary schools in the 1980s and early 1990s (before the subject was abandoned). He also taught bitmap computer graphics. Most of my childhood art is computer printouts, including lots of people drawn from hexagons on an isometric grid.)

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[jones_supa]

Actually it does, because along the console, the same Steam is provided to all x86 Ubuntu desktop systems.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Kjella]

Small business may remain Microsoft's saving grace as end users defect to tablets and larger corporations migrate to platform independent solutions.

Don't you mean web applications and Java 1.0? Oh right it's not 1995 anymore, but if history doesn't repeat itself I do feel it rhyme. I predict that in another 10 years Slashdot will still be predicting the imminent doom of Microsoft....

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[xaxa]

I've just read the Wikipedia page -- apparently there's AutoCAD for Mac OS already.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AutoCAD#Mac_OS

I'm amazed they sell the light version through the App store -- don't Apple take a hefty cut of those sales?

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, they've said this is the exact reason they're jumping ship. Microsoft doesn't want a cut of Steam's sales. Microsoft fully intends to replace Steam and other digital distribution channels with the Windows Store. Simple as that.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Richy_T]

Except 2007 was the year of the "set you could not put a box on top of".

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Microlith]

Also, as far as marketplace lock-in, that's complete rubbish.

No, it's not. You just don't realize it because.

[I] haven't had to use a single one from the Windows / Metro thingy

Of course you don't have to. Yet. You also haven't used anything built on the WinRT APIs. You also aren't using Windows RT devices.

But make no mistake: Microsoft wants that aspect of Windows gone. And they'll keep marginalizing it and pushing the APIs that give them more control.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[the_Bionic_lemming]

Started Using Ubuntu when Steam rolled out - I can definitely assure the Linux developers the easiest way to proportionally reduce my use of windows is to increase the proportion of linux gaming.

Please save me from Windows 8 and the trainwreck that follows!

signed - ex microsoft shill

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[EvanED]

Games are an interesting problem but that's being addressed by Valve.

Valve's working on it, but there's on so much they can do. They only have indirect say over what platforms other publishers wirte for (unless they overextend their hand even for them, I suspect), and even if they can convince publishers to start writing Linux versions, there's still an enormous backlog of Windows- or Windows/Mac-only games that probably won't even be ported.

I am quite happy for what Valve is doing, but I am also quite skeptical about "the year of Linux on the desktop" for a while longer. At least unless they've got something else up their sleeve like a much better Wine layer. At least for me, even if all future games were cross platform I have quite a lot of backlog to play through before I drop Windows.

That's why you can't name drop any of them, in stark contrast to perhaps to a single video,audio, or CAD tool that costs more than you are willing to spend.

I've bought two versions of Lightroom and will probably buy more. Most entries on the Wine Application Compatibility DB for it are "garbage". Even the couple entries that are higher certainly don't sound it to me; the ratings on the appdb have always seemed very soft. (e.g. a bronze rating where "Viewing pictures in Library/Develop (invisible)" does not work... that's primary functionality! How does something where the program basically doesn't work get a bronze rating?)

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Microlith]

Last I checked I could still install software from any source I wanted to, unless this has changed in the last half hour.

The "Modern" environment, from day one, only allows installations of software signed by Microsoft. Ditto for anything using the WinRT APIs.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nerdfest]

I'm not talking about tablets here, I'm talking about the desktop. Even with 'Pro' you can't I don't think you can install applications that use the new interface other than through their market. Using the old interface yes, but as I said, I think you'll see that disappear. You think the timing of 'secure boot' was an accident? They know it'll scare off a lot of people and they want to make it as hard as possible to leave.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Gaygirlie]

A lot of people always claimed that games were the only reason they were still on Windows.

I am one of those people and, well, this changes nothing. 99% of all my games are still Windows-only and I have no intention of ditching them just to move to Linux. And I am quite certain the same applies to a whole lot of other gamers.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nadaka]

I do unix development (enterprise web applications for the DoD), but I am forced to suffer through the use of windows by my IT department because they can't take up 4.5 gigs of ram (on a machine that has only 4 gigs of ram) on their spyware and virus scans if I was using any other OS. On linux or unix, they wouldn't be able make my JVM fail to start due to not enough memory, or delete my JDK because they wanted to update java to a version later than the one required by the god damn government contract, and they would be able to block my access so easily to code documentation sites, because fuck being able to look anything up.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nadaka]

Most "CAD" usage can be done in sketchup or similar software available on linux. You only need autocad and the other heavy hitters if you are doing more analytical work.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[WuphonsReach]

Outlook is garbage unless you're talking to an Exchange server. It barely supports IMAP.

Not to say that TBird can't be improved (especially task/calendar stuff), but for large mailboxes over IMAP it's far better then Outlook. Plus better support for multiple email address scenarios where you need to either have multiple aliases for a mailbox or have multiple mailboxes.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Vanderhoth]

I certainly don't disagree with you.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Howitzer86]

Yeah, I heard somewhere that many schools avoid subjects like that now in order to meet grading standards. But when I was going to middle school in the late 90s I had this awesome computer class tought by a guy named Mr. Wilson. The iMac and iBook had just come out, and the class upgraded over the break so I applied to come back to it the next year. I had my first introduction to 3d graphics on the desktop the very last day of that year. I don't remember the name of it but it was something simple like Truespace.

It left a huge impression on me. Kids these days... man I fear for them.

/OT

Here's Autodesk's Mac Compatibility page. It's kinda stretched with filler like a bad essay, full of apps that need virtual machines to run, and multiple versions of the same app. But... for what it's worth they at least bothered to make a list.

http://usa.autodesk.com/products/mac-compatible-products

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Howitzer86]

I bet big companies get special deals with Apple because they lend legitimacy to the App Store.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Kremmy]

All it did was make it so "set-top box" means the set goes on top.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Pretty much the only reason I don't virtualize windows and use another host OS is due to games not virtualizing well. However everything else can virtualize just fine.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[xaxa]

Yeah, I heard somewhere that many schools avoid subjects like that now in order to meet grading standards.

In this case, the government removed the subject from the official curriculum (British students can choose what they study, at age 14-16 and again at 16-18, from what a school offers. The school chooses what to offer from what the government permits).

I don't know why -- I was only about 6 years old. I remember my dad being really sad that the subject he'd taught for 15 years or so, in a rough area but in a city known for good engineering (making it a subject the usually "mischievous" boys actually liked and respected) was abandoned.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[nine-times]

Outlook is garbage unless you're talking to an Exchange server. It barely supports IMAP.

True enough, but Exchange is hardly rare.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Anonymous Coward]

vertical market stuff has been addressed in my field by loading the offending program in a VM, and then having the user RDP or VNC in. Let windows run where it best belongs, In a window.

Also, Most recent Vertical market stuff is either in webfrontends or if they require direct hardware access, java. Only the really shitty antiquated stuff still requires a win32 app or a IE 6 ActiveX page, and those are handled by remoting in to a VM.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[dehole]

Yes, that's why Microsoft and Adobe have freely available pirated versions. They would rather you be dependent on their product, than for you to use something else.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Dr_Barnowl]

Yup, and this is likely the motivation behind UEFI Secure Boot. It sounds great - who would turn down "better security" - but it really does mean better security - for Microsoft, who can be sure that they can prevent a machine running anything they haven't cryptographically signed themselves. Not yet, but this is one of those things where you can easily see which way they want the wind to blow. They are setting up the same walled garden as Apple has in iOS.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Dr_Barnowl]

Yeah, as I've commented before, what business really needs to move to Linux is a department or service company that specializes in converting all the stuff they have implemented as VBA, Access databases, and spittle, across to the new platform.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[iggymanz]

you only need the "heavy hitters" for designing real things in the real world: buildings, bridges, dams, machined parts, etc.

too bad open source world doesn't have viable solution yet.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nadaka]

Its an extremely limited technical market. One that does not strongly overlap with programming. Open source OS's exist because programmers use OS's. Open source development environments exist because developers use IDE's. Open source games exist because developers play games.

Open source solutions will exist as soon as YOU and your fellow architects/engineers make them, that is no different than any other field.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[EvanED]

There are some good games. But where's Mass Effect? Xcom? Hell, where's Portal?

There problem is almost all good games are not available. At this point you're still very limited in the selection. If you're happy with what's there, or are satisfied enough that it makes up for not having to deal with Windows, that's great. (I'd recommend Frozen Synapse, which IIRC is there.) But at the same time, a lot of people won't agree.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[interval1066]

Oh, just as an aside, Steam for Linux just trotted out Half-Life Deathmatch for Linux and it rocks. There aren't a lot of Deathmatch Classic players out there, but there are a few, and the game is every bit as great as it was on Windows. And its free. Grab it and go Half-Lifers!

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Hadlock]

We did something like AutoCAD 2.0 on some ancient (even then) B&W screen Mac SE's in 7th/8th grade Wood Shop back in 1995/1996. The core product/concept hasn't changed a lot, but it was neat to "build your own house" back then.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Hadlock]

It's not that limited, there are lots of tinkerers, amateur home re-modelers etc that would use this product. My uncle would have used a free version of AutoCAD to design his garage/workshop expansion or his detached chicken coop on the property.
 
Perhaps as 3D printing becomes more ubiquitous, we'll see an open source version of SolidWorks (which has some AutoCAD functionality) created. Google SketchUp is sort of like a fischer price toy in comparison unfortunately.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nadaka]

Sketchup and similar modeling software is already more than adequate for the amateur tinkerer doing home remodeling.

AutoCAD is only truly required when you need to perform a cost of materials estimate for a complex commercial building, or model the loads and strengths of materials for supporting heavy structures.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[westlake]

It looks like this might finally be the year. With Windows 8 throwing a lot of users away with a bad interface and a marketplace lock-in.

PC games --- from the casual to the most sophisticated --- are run full screen, each with its own UI.

The geek may have a dozen desktop apps running across multiple screens, which is trivially easy to do in Windows 8. Use multiple monitors But I've never found a plausible excuse for putting more than six quick-launch apps on the taskbar, including Skype and a radio player.

There is no "marketplace lock-in " on the Win 8 desktop.

The Windows Store is --- for all practical purposes --- indistinguishable from the Android, Apple or Ubuntu store. The best "Modern" apps have a distinctive look and feel. They install easily and are updated frequently.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Hadlock]

I wish I had mod points for this whole thread.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Microlith]

Also, isn't WinRT for tablets / ARM devices / that kind of thing?

It's a case of Microsoft using needlessly confusing terminology. Windows RT is Windows 8 for ARM devices. WinRT are new APIs available as part of Windows 8.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nerdfest]

It is certainly indistinguishable from the Apple iOS App store ... you have no alternatives. You can *only* install 'Metro' apps through it. Ubuntu and Android allow alternate sources and alternate stores. There certainly is lock-in. Microsoft is virtually drooling over it. Don't count on being able to have that legacy interface around for more than a version or two.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Rockoon]

The IT department being incompetent and/or harmful to your job says nothing about Windows. It just tells us that your IT department is a bunch of fuckups, and imagine those fuckups attempting to manage a large collection of linux machines... it will be more of the same, perhaps with some added hilarity.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[antdude]

So, you're fine using the keyboards and mice with W8's Metro GUI? I still can't stand it. I am fine if it was a touchscreen.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Rockoon]

Its an extremely limited technical market. One that does not strongly overlap with programming.

This isnt the reason. There are extremely limited technical markets where FOSS is easily winning.. such as the statistics package 'R' -- nothing else even comes close.

Open source solutions will exist as soon as YOU and your fellow architects/engineers make them, that is no different than any other field.

'cept they are too busy making real money working with professional CAD programs to bother writing their own CAD programs. Think about the tradeoff.

Once you get into the realm where people need niche tools for highly paid professional work then FOSS falls flat because the professionals are more than willing to spend thousands of dollars on tools that enable them to earn an income well above the median, and that attracts developers looking to satisfy those professionals needs so that they too can earn an income well above the median.

Nearly every FOSS gem is in an area that does NOT involve highly paid professionals. As with anything else, its the money.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[iggymanz]

no, Sketchup can't even do serious 2D drafting, which AutoCAD does. so that's what I continue to use.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[iggymanz]

it strongly overlaps with programming, engineers do program. but it takes man-decades of work to make a decent CAD software. I'm 50 already, I don't have the (life) time

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nadaka]

Statistics is a field strongly overlapping with programming. Everyone with a programming degree learns basic to moderate statistics. Most people with a statistics degree learn basic to moderate programming.

You can write an open source CAD program in your free time, just like everyone else writes their open source projects in their free time regardless of their highly payed professional work. That is not a defect of open source software, that is a defect of the people like you who are willing to put in the effort to have it.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nadaka]

If there are enough of you, it won't take your lifetime. That is the benefit of open source development, you get to share the effort with hundreds or thousands of other people interested in solving the same problem.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nadaka]

Neither. Most people use CAD as a simple modeling package most of the time. Even an architect can get away with doing most of his mockups in such an environment. Only the technical work and blueprints need to be done in a real CAD program.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[iggymanz]

well CAD software is roughly in complexity on the order of an operating system, might be over decade with all the developers one could wish for an AutoCAD or Pro/E or solidworks grade product. there's a reason people pay $4,000 - $30,000 for this stuff

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Nadaka]

There was a time when an operating system cost 6 figures retail. And there are multiple projects that cost upwards of a half billion dollars to implement. I have worked on titanic projects like that.

AutoCAD? The others? No where near that complexity.

They are more complex than video games, but not that many orders of magnitude more so.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Rockoon]

You can write an open source CAD program in your free time

You don't seem to understand the very vast difference between a hobby CAD project and professional CAD software. There are already plenty of FOSS CAD programs. They all are great if you are just some schmuck that isnt a professional CAD user, but are completely unfit for purpose if you are actually a professional.

A more well understood example of this is GIMP. None of the GIMP developers understand the needs of professional photographers. The reason for this is that the GIMP developers are not motivated to understand them, let alone motivated to target the software at them. Switch your reference frame to Adobe on the other hand.. they most certainly are not only motivated to understand the needs of the professional photographer, but also motivated to satisfy them. Thats how they feed their wives and children, how they fund their vacations, how they pay off their mortgages, how they have nice things in general.

FOSS cannot compete in niche spaces where people are willing to spend lots of money on software, because its the money stupid. FOSS wins in spaces with widespread audiances, and in niche spaces where there isnt much money to be had. FOSS loses hard in spaces with lots of motivational money.. again and again.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[blackest_k]

You don't , your new boss does.

Your home computer doesn't get audited, your work one might.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[doronbc]

It wouldn't make sense as most top games still only run on windows.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Techman83]

It's garbage even when Talking to an exchange server. It's rather telling when a 3rd party plugin (Zimbra Connector for Outlook) makes Outlook behave better than using exchange directly.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[smi.james.th]

What I did first thing was uninstall all the Metro-style apps, Mail, Music, etc. Stupid things insist on being full-screen. Goodbye to them. I installed all my own things, Firefox, Songbird, etc. They work like normal desktop apps. From there it looks exactly like a slightly slicker Win7 interface, except without a Start button. To get around that, as soon as I press the start button on the keyboard I just start typing the name of whatever I want and the search function takes away all the irrelevant stuff, so I can either press enter or click on it. My frequently used applications though I just pin to the taskbar exactly as I did with Win7,

Some features of Win8 I actually really like, for example the new, more informative copy dialog, and the ribbon at the top of Windows Explorer (I was one of those who liked the ribbon in Office). The start screen is a bit annoying but not enough to make my life miserable since I can exploit its features to get places faster. So all in all a positive experience.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[antdude]

Metro GUI is the biggest thing that turn me off in W8 and W9/Blue. I don't like that ribbon toolbar too either. I do like the enhancements like you said. You forgot the Task Manager too! I will stick with XP SP3 until MS drops its support, W7, Linux, and Mac OS X for now.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[smi.james.th]

Ja, the new task manager is pretty cool :)

As I mentioned though, if I had a choice I'm a Linux man, to me it just feels more comfortable, but since I need to use certain software for work and I don't like dual-booting, I stick with Windows. It's not as bad as it was historically. Each to their own though, it's a matter of opinion. And as I said, once you work around the start screen the Metro GUI almost disappears.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[antdude]

I use W8 for testing at work. I have been using since its pre-release days. Same for other Windows versions. :(

Why not use virtual machines to avoid rebootings and to use at the same time?

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[smi.james.th]

More pain. I can't be bothered with that, I prefer Linux to Windows, but I don't have a desperate need to use it. Most of what I need (Firefox, etc) runs natively on Windows, so there's no need to waste resources and virtualise a Linux box...

It's a pity you don't like it I guess. I think it was a bold move by Microsoft but most of the people I know who have been using it now actually like it. There are a couple that don't, and those that don't are computer literate enough to remove the things they don't like. Changes will never be universally liked I guess.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[cbhacking]

Wrong about both.

It's fully possible, and supported, to sideload "Metro" apps. It is not encouraged, and is harder to find than the "unlock for sideloading" on Android, but it's present, documented, and works. It's also free (i.e. no annual charge like developer-unlock for Windows Phone or iOS) and not limited in the number of apps you can install that way.

As for the desktop (which still has no such restrictions at all, except on RT where they were quickly broken) going away... bullshit. Microsoft got to where they are now, and where they have been, by building a first-tier you-can-depend-on-us story for backward compatibility in business, academia, and home software. Win8 will happily play Total Annihilation, a game released 15 years earlier and unsupported for the vast majority of that time. It can execute batch scripts written for Windows 95 or NT 4.0. Even many legacy drivers from the NT 5.x family (2000 - Server 2003) are still supported in NT 6.2 (Win8 / Server 2012), architecture being accounted for (only NT 5.2 from the last major version family supported x64).

You know what all of those things have in common? They all require the desktop. Windows Store apps can't run external software, and existing software can't be re-bundled as an app without significant effort and source code access. Windows Store apps can't run any form of standard Windows script except for JS in an HTML5 app, which is hardly the typical way Windows scripts are written. Windows Store apps lack the permissions to install drivers. Windows Store apps have no support for legacy APIs; they don't even support the full modern Win32 or .NET APIs. Windows Store apps lack the dead-simple user experience of OLE (embed anything in anything) that is part of what has made Office so successful. Windows Store apps can't create arbitrary long-running background processes; good for battery life, bad for anybody trying to replicate anything that uses a Windows Service in Metro. Windows Store apps always run with low, sandboxed privileges; good for containing malware, useless for any kind of system utility.

There's no way the desktop is going away. Home users *might* be able to mostly get by on Metro right now - although there's no chance that the current full versions of Office will fit, so the desktop certainly isn't dead even for them - but schools, businesses, and servers still rely on the desktop and even the most boneheaded managers at Microsoft aren't going to tell their entire locked-in customer base that they can no longer serve their needs.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Krneki]

yap

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[ciderbrew]

100% my point with added auditing. Most people can't afford the full version they go on to use at work, so it isn't even a lost sale. Sale was impossible.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Sigg3.net]

Plenty of people only use their computers for basic web/email/word processing and games and the only thing that ties them to Windows is games. I'm sure plenty would welcome the opportunity to not have to pay for Windows (or have the hassle of pirating it) so long as the games they want to play are available on Linux.

You forget that apart from the hardcore gamers, the average gamer will use whatever OS that is currently on the box. You'll need a heavy branding of GNU/Linux qua The Gamer OS (TM) before these guys switch + an option to buy commodity computers without an OS. I have yet to succeed in getting my mythical Windows refunds, usually I'm told to shop elsewhere if I'm "gonna be trouble".

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Sigg3.net]

I use Windows 8 in our troubleshooting lab. It's just like unity.

The problem isn't the GUI but the crappy proprietary core. If you ported Metro to GNU/Linux you'd have Ubuntu with desktop icons.

Windows' new GUI is the last of its problems. I like GNU/Linux and am biased, but I am confident GNU/Linux is a superior OS; with regards to security, usability, stability and epistemology (computer understanding).

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[RoboJ1M]

I would say by 2012 myself.
Not a single person I know uses a desktop machine at home any more.
They already use consoles for gaming, set top boxes for media consumption and phones/pads for internet access.
The only desktop I use is at work for windows development.
At home I have a desktop which is now in charge of recording TV, serving it back up.
All the storage I moved onto one of the shockingly good NAS boxes (which are actually full blown servers in all but name).
I think Linux/UNIX won the desktop by making it irrelevant, because it's what every person runs on their phone, pad, NAS, router, TV and (soon to be) console.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[chrish]

Given the lackluster results of having Steam on my Mac, I can't say I'm optimistic. By "lackluster" I mean the usual Mac gaming problems:

• Mac versions are often slow to appear, if they ever do.
• Mac versions have awful performance (is it Cider? is it OpenGL? is it the drivers? who knows).

Hopefully on Linux the second problem won't be such an issue, but I don't see the first problem changing.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[philip.paradis]

If the rest of the company's business decisions were that sound, somehow I'm not surprised they had trouble keeping things going.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Gallomimia]

A very good point about the IT dept being fuckups, but you need to examine closely the fact that their major fuckup is that their reasons for using windows is firstly cited as needing to have spyware and virus scans run constantly in order to keep the windows machines secure. Circular logic is not logical.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[Blaskowicz]

Because your company (the one that employs you, or the one you've created) will buy that paid version.

Re:Year of the Linux Desktop?

[iggymanz]

having worked with the internals of various OS and CAD systems, I'm laughing.

Re:Debian? EWWWWW...

[JonJ]

I think you might mean formally...

Ooooh, maybe I can run the distribution on my PS3!

[Ardeaem]

Oh, right. Never mind.

So this is the Steam Box

[Anonymous Coward]

Standard OS, standard hardware, standard drivers.

I for one welcome our moneyed overlords. If anyone has the clout to push developers to include Linux drivers with their releases it will be Valve.

Re:Maybe

[Microlith]

it does not break the existing applications on each relevant update

Can you explain how this is expressed in the Linux world? I know unsubstantiated claims made to attack Linux are acceptable (unlike every other platform) but I insist that you expand upon this.

I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

1) The hardware is open so that you can (if you wish) put a different Linux distribution on it.

2) If the Steam Box software works on any distribution you so install.

3) The games are protected only by Steam's own DRM and not encumbered by anything more onerous.

4) All games use the controller. The keyboard and mouse can be an option, but it should not be the only option.

I know this makes it nothing more than a nice small form factor PC with a standard spec. I'm happy for it to be exactly that.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[gQuigs]

1/2) Install other distros
I belive they have said they want to make it open enough to potentially run Windows, so I think other distros should run fine (well, except if the distro doesn't provide enough up-to-date bits).

3) The games are protected only by Steam's own DRM and not encumbered by anything more onerous.
That's all games made by Valve. Other companies can include worse DRM, but I don't think they will be able to get root. So they are stuck with always online DRM; which means I won't consider those games anyway...

4) All games use the controller. The keyboard and mouse can be an option, but it should not be the only option.
I think that is Valve's vision. Have you tried Big Picture mode?

I would also consider buying one just if it's a nice small form factor PC, even if I can't upgrade anything besides the hard drive. (And it's at a comparable price point to consoles).

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[wonkey_monkey]

2) If the Steam Box software works on any distribution you so install.

I'm sure Steam will relish the job of maintaining their software on, and providing support to the users of, every distribution. Lucky there's not many of them, then!

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[wonkey_monkey]

I'm sure Steam

Valve. I meant Valve!

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[subanark]

1. I think this is required as part of the GPL. And Valve hasn't tried to stop running their games on other distros.
2. Not possible. Some distributions will simply be incompatible by their design. It would be up to each distro to ensure compatibility.
3. Their DRM is their DRM. As per #1 and #2, I don't think they will do any hardware DRM integration.
4. I don't think they will include a keyboard and mouse, so a developer that requires one would face an uphill battle. I don't think Valve will completely ban those devices though.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[zzottt]

so basically you have built up a wall of ultimatums before the thing is even seen the light of day? If you dont want it just say so

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Anonymous Coward]

Steam's own DRM is already pretty onerous. Valve's biggest feat was selling geeks on such DRM as being acceptable. Does it work if your internet goes away? Yea, usually. But only one computer playing *any* Steam purchase at a time (2 diff computers, 2 diff games, purchased under same account? no go). Wanna play those games in 20 years after Valve has retired Steam (not impossible), you'll need cracks. Joy!

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Microlith]

#1 is required only as a facet of the GPLv3.
#2 is where obscure distros leverage their userbase. Thus Steam for Linux is already running on many distros other than just Ubuntu, even if Valve doesn't officially support them.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[GigaBurglar]

"3rd-party GPU drivers that don't work in *every* distribution." - says who? The Linux kernel is just that - the Linux kernel. A distribution is a collection of user-space software packages, software repositories, and a file system structure - nothing else.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[CronoCloud]

MOBA's are essentially action RPG's with RTS elements so it would be possible to do a controller centric control scheme... in fact it's already been done. Google "Guardians of Middle Earth"

And it's also possible to do an RTS with a controller, considering it's been done before. The only controls an RTS absolutely needs are a pointer, a way to move a pointer, an ability to select onscreen elements, and an ability to cancel. Everything else is extra. So basically a joypad and two buttons are all you really need. Remember, the first RTS ever was a Sega Genesis game, Herzog Zwei abd Westwoods seminal RTS Dune II was also available on the Genesis. You know that context sensitive cursor in Westwood's C&C? That idea came from the Genesis port of Dune II.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[EvanED]

"3rd-party GPU drivers that don't work in *every* distribution." - says who? The Linux kernel is just that - the Linux kernel. A distribution is a collection of user-space software packages, software repositories, and a file system structure - nothing else.

Um, not really. Often distros include their own patches to both the kernel and user-level software. It's certainly conceivable -- though unlikely/rare -- that a distro's patches could break drivers.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[EvanED]

Yes, you can make a RTS playable by controller by some definition. But to do so you either have to make it much harder to play by controller, make it much easier to play by keyboard/mouse, or offer two modes. My suspicion is that the two modes thing would have to be sufficiently different as to require quite a bit of "duplicate" engineering.

My worry would be that the keyboard/mouse input would suffer as a result; as a PC gamer (more than "casual", less than "hardcore") it already seems like making games multiplatform are causing the PC versions to be "dumbed down" a bit.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

I imagine it being an option. Possibly an inferior option. I'd play that kind of game on a desktop machine, personally.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

Maybe you're right. If that is the case then I won't buy one. I'm sure enough people will.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

I'm being realistic. What kind of idiot would imagine that anything involving Steam won't use DRM?

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

OK then. You're right. That was wrong of me. How about if I just want them to not explictly prevent it from running on any given distro? It is entirely unrealistic to expect them to support it on every distribution, but I'd want there to be no obstacles placed in the way of any given distro.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

Don't you think that 'threatens' is still too strong of a word? I'm not fool enough to imagine my custom to be important enough that I can threaten Steam by offering to withdraw it. In truth, I'm a Steam customer and will remain one, regardless. The "Steam Box" would potentially be a nice adjunct to the existing business relationship between is. As was suggested in another reply, I'd have to at least look at the Steam Box even if it differed from the idea I have in mind. I could find all kinds of uses for a nice set top box that runs Linux. Preferably not Ubuntu Linux, hence my first two points.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

I have used Big Picture mode actually. It's OK, and I don't mind if that's the default UI for the Steam Box. It doesn't do anything to ensure the games are controller compatible though. Big Picture will happily show you those ones which are not.

Aside from my preference for a controller, where exactly does one place the mouse when sitting in a comfy armchair?

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

Thank you. They may even get me as a customer regardless of this wishlist, if they come up with something I still consider attractive.

If they don't, well... I doubt Gabe Newell will lose sleep over it.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

Nah. I'm saying that I don't buy products that don't do what I want them to do. I choose not to buy them without any bitterness or anger. I simply look at a different product instead.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

I'm advocating for what I want. Apparently it's not what you want. You appear to want games to use a control scheme which is based on the keyboard and mouse. I've never found mouse control to be adequate for any gaming use, personally.

Then again, I don't play competitive online FPS.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[Soluzar]

You know, I could. I really got over the idea of wanting to a long time ago, though. I'd rather buy something that was made for the purpose by someone with better skills than mine.

Re:I would buy a Steam Box if...

[CronoCloud]

But to do so you either have to make it much harder to play by controller, make it much easier to play by keyboard/mouse, or offer two modes.

I've not played many console RTS's, the ones I have are all PSone titles (distinct lack of such for the PS2/PS3) Every single one of them support the PSone mouse. so there is that option, though it doesn't seem to make much difference in playability, For the C&C titles/Dune 2000 it makes some functions easier but some functions harder.

My suspicion is that the two modes thing would have to be sufficiently different as to require quite a bit of "duplicate" engineering.

Probably. The best of the PSone RTS's in my opinion was Warzone 2100 which was developed as a cross-platform title and performs better on the PSone than the C&C based titles do (uses a 3D engine for one reason) It's UI actually changes depending on what controls you have hooked up to your PSone.
Hook up a PSone mouse and you get more UI buttons. ( but lose the ability to directly drive your command vehicle.

It's a pretty good game, the company released the source to it.

it already seems like making games multiplatform are causing the PC versions to be "dumbed down" a bit.

I've always considered that statement to be somewhat of an "elistist grognard" attitude. I feel the same way to a certain extent. I'm old enough to remember when a larger proportion of PC gamers played games from companies like SSI, and Origin...before DOOM and other games brought in a load of what I used to call "frat boy gamers", but now just call "dudebros" But...without the masses there wouldn't be enough people to make certain genre's profitable. It's a good thing that games are more "user friendly" and don't require tedious note-taking or graph paper maps.

Re:Maybe

[Soluzar]

I never found that older applications were broken under Linux. They usually just required (at worst) for you to install an older version of a shared library, which you can do side-by-side with the current version. Sometimes it was necessary to compile afresh, that was fine though. A good makefile renders this automatic. My Linux knowledge is ancient though. The Kernel still had a major version starting with 2 when I last used it. My knowledge may be outdated or otherwise faulty.

Re:Grammar suggestion

[ArcadeMan]

A game "concole"?

Re:Maybe

[TheSpoom]

As desktop, Linux still sucks

...for you. Which is fine. I love it and use it every day.

Windows have serious security problems, etc etc but it does not break the existing applications on each relevant update and have behavior/interface consistence

There's an argument to made that this has happened in the Windows world a few times, but I digress. Gnome fucked up badly with Gnome 3. We get that. A lot of us still hold a grudge against them for that. That sort of update is in the minority. Most (as in 99.9%) updates I install work without any sort of configuration changes needed, and as an additional nice point, don't require a reboot (usually only kernel updates need a reboot in Linux).

I'm not trying to sell you, I'm just pointing out that what you've heard doesn't mesh with my experience.

Wish I had a mod point for you.

[doug141]

When XP was introduced, I switched to windows for the games. I have happily paid for newer versions of Windows since because they are very usable and I don't want to learn linux. Now, there's no good new version of windows to switch to, based on what I'm reading about windows 8. Apparently valve and steam are making gaming on linux easier than ever. I'm at risk of trying it and finding I like it. The real threat to Microsoft may be their own vision with Windows 8.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[TrancePhreak]

based on what I'm reading about windows 8.

Which is the real problem. Most people I've seen who say it's bad haven't even used it. In the future, it should become the de-facto Windows gaming iteration, as they cleaned up and refined the graphics systems.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[jxander]

I've used it. Fairly extensively over the past few months, much to my chagrin

Both of my younger sisters were gifted with Windows 8 laptops last Christmas, and figuring out how to set them up has been harder than learning Linux. And I'm an MCSE. Not that the cert means all that much, but I've always leaned Windows-way for the majority of my computing needs, only delving into *nix for some back end stuff and my HTPC.

Up until now, even the bad versions of windows (ME, Vista, etc) were at least functional and somewhat familiar. I could use them, even if they crapped their pants every hour or two. With windows 8, this is no longer the case. Maybe windows 9 will rectify this, but by then it might be too late.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[equex]

Did people forget that the whole reason people read about tech is to navigate away from stuff that seems like a problem, and go for the stuff that works ? Who the hell reads what they write about Win8 and then actually installs it after ? Nobody blames anyone from steering away from broken cpu architechtures and bad gfx cards that they read about. Who made it a sin to do the same with Win8 ?

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[nine-times]

Most people I've seen who say it's bad haven't even used it.

Care to cite some evidence?

I don't doubt that *many* of the people who say it's bad haven't used it, but I have already heard from many people who say it's bad and have used it. I've used it. It's bad.

Not that it's all bad. There have been many improvements, both under the hood and in the visible feature set. If they hadn't forced the Metro UI (or whatever they're calling it) on desktop users, it would be a good upgrade to Windows 7. However, the new UI is terrible. I've even used it on tablets, and it's not actually good for that either.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[Dr_Barnowl]

Yeah, I skipped WinXP and went straight to Vista.

Why? Because I bought a game that needed a cryptographic API that wasn't available in Windows 2000 - it just refused to install. And I thought "what the heck, may as well go for up-to-date".

I'm sure it wasn't the game that needed newer crypto, of course, it was the DRM on the game.

I upgraded to Windows 7 voluntarily, and we all know why I did that too.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[EvanED]

The worst part for me is that most people complain about Metro without realizing it works exactly like the Windows 7 start menu - shortcuts are identical.

Not quite identical.

It's funny, because I mostly agree with you; Metro actually affects my day-to-day use of Windows almost not at all. Under Win7, when I wanted to start a program, I pressed the Win key, typed part of the name, and hit enter. In Win8, when I want to start a program, I press the Win key, type part of the name, and hit enter. I do occasionally notice differences (e.g. when I want to click something, in which case I'd say it changes a lot), but honestly even Chrome's UI has more of a negative effect on my day-to-day use.

However, I do have one tiny complaint about it where it differs from Win7, which is that the search scope is different. There are three scopes: start menu entries, settings, and files. In Win7, it would search all three; in Win8, it only shows you results from one at a time. So if I want to bring up environment variable settings, in Win7 I would also just press the windows key, type "environment variables", and hit enter -- but in Win8, you have to either press Win-W or switch the active scope after the search has been started (I only know how to do this by clicking).

So I don't really like the changes -- though I can definitely buy that it's better for touch-first devices -- but I also almost don't notice them from some point of view.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[Espectr0]

I installed windows 8. Benchmark-wise, it's a little slower than windows 7 in games, but not much. Might get better with polished drivers.

Business wise, it's a mess. The new UI lowers productivity. Install classic shell and it's mostly windows 7 with some fixes. MS should include a GPO to disable the UI and make everyone happy. They removed the free windows xp mode which is really bad for people willing to upgrade.

I don't see anything in windows 8 to support your gaming claim.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[Alarash]

Yes you are correct, that can be annoying and it used to frustrate me. But then I realize, 90% of the time I look for a program, not a setting, so for the 10 remaining percent, I can make the effort of clicking. But you are correct, that's a regression from W7 and they should make it a setting.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[Spiridios]

based on what I'm reading about windows 8.

Which is the real problem. Most people I've seen who say it's bad haven't even used it. In the future, it should become the de-facto Windows gaming iteration, as they cleaned up and refined the graphics systems.

I've used it - it's installed on my TV room computer (can't really call it an HTPC). As a developer, I don't like it as a desktop, but I could possibly grow to like it for the usecase I have it in once native apps start becoming available. But I'm not so sure about the de-factor Windows gaming iteration, what with them throwing away XNA for native apps. Gotta go to Monogame if you want a native XNA game. With all the big-name studios turning out clones of each other and turning on draconian DRM, XNA is actually a decent part of the games that are actually worth playing.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[LateArthurDent]

Which is the real problem. Most people I've seen who say it's bad haven't even used it. In the future, it should become the de-facto Windows gaming iteration, as they cleaned up and refined the graphics systems.

I use it. I have to, as that's what we use at work. There is nothing about it that's any good. If you install Classic Shell, it's tolerable, except for when you click on a file that ends up opening a metro app and then you have to fix the association so it won't ever do it again.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[Patch86]

I've used it, and I don't like it. It's an unpleasant mess of poorly thought out interface paradigms, hacked together without much thought. And I'm not saying that as some sort of desktop purist- I've used and like (to a point) Unity, Android on a large screen, KDE4, Mac...

I'm a Linux user, but I've always purchased a gaming machine with Windows on it. I currently have a gaming desktop with a (legitimate and paid for) Win7 install (dual booting with Ubuntu) for playing games on. And I'm perfectly happy with it; Win7 is a good piece of software. When it comes time to upgrade, I'll seriously assess whether I still need a Windows boot for the games I want to play. My desktop has got another couple of years on it yet, so if Steam (and others) can make Linux a gaming platform by then, then I'll be sold. At the moment, I would not willingly buy a Win8 computer. Full stop.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[jxander]

Some of the problems are, I think, recursive. There aren't a whole lot of Win8 enthusiasts, so a lot of potential enthusiasts are turned off at the lack of literature ... so that means there are less Win8 enthusiasts to write said literature. And really, no one wants to pioneer a Microsoft product. If you're forced out of your comfort zone to learn a new OS, might as well be a free and useful OS.

As for Windows itself, do you still have to download a 3rd party tool, in order to make Desktop Icons for the new version? The "Live Tiles." Barring that, have they implemented a quick switch for "Boot to normal desktop," so that we can use our own desktop icons like we've has since Win 3? Or is that still a suite of 3rd party tools and manual GPO fixes, and ugly work-arounds?

Windows 8 Metro interface is hideous. Worthless as anything beyond a child's coloring book. Switching to a reasonable facsimile of a real desktop is an arduous and incomplete process, designed intentionally to be arduous and incomplete so that you are forced to learn their happy new coloring book methodology. If you honestly think that touch-interfaces are what's coming up for administrative functions, or really anything beyond angry-birds, light web browsing and content consumption ... I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. And truth be told, the content consumption only works because it requires less interaction with the GUI. Press a few buttons, music/movie playing, and you're set for several hours. When the best function of an OS is "the times when you're not actually using the OS," you might have an issue.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[whydavid]

Either you are exaggerating greatly or your experience as an MCSE is actually harming your ability to learn Win 8. Windows 8 desktop-mode is an evolution from Win 7. The new UI is obnoxious, but there is nothing complex about it. For the lay person, Windows 8 will work out of the box, and they'll be able to buy everything they need from the app store (which is also a seamless experience). In the worst case, you face the minor annoyance of switching to desktop mode to get a similar experience to Win 7, which of course was well-regarded by users. Let's compare this to my experience last week loading Ubuntu 12.04 on my Lenovo laptop. Installation was seamless and the wireless connection was easy to set up. Then, after install, the OS asked to download some updates. Boom. Broken wireless. The solution? Just figure out the exact model of my wireless adapter, download the appropriate drivers on a different machine (a wired connection was not available), load them into Linux, then block the OS from making changes to this driver. Luckily, this issue was easy to locate a solution for, because it has affected many users of the same (Broadcom) wireless adapter and has been an issue for years. The last time Windows Update rendered my machine useless? Never (and really, WU hasn't caused significant issues for users on a wide scale for nearly a decade since the infamous XP service pack issues). I hope and pray Windows never becomes as "user-friendly" as any Linux flavor I've ever encountered. Give me Linux on my server and my development box, and give me Windows on my recreation box. Both are fine, but Linux really isn't anywhere close to unseating MS in the usability space; I don't think the high incidence of Asperger's in the techie crowd and the high incidence of techies who think Linux is as usable as Windows is any sort of coincidence.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[jxander]

Windows 8 desktop mode is reasonably user friendly, but getting to it is kludgey, and feels like something that could easily be broken by any patch or Service Pack. Plus it lacks a lot of the functionality of 7. Not the user experience you should expect from a $150 piece of SW with over two decades of fine tuning. I do like the fact that I "can buy everything I'll ever need from the seamlessly built-in app store." That makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.

For the record : I created an automated task to run at startup that launches explorer.exe. It works, but begs the question ... why is the newest version of this OS just a weaker iteration of the last version, requiring duct tape to achieve reduced functionality? It also begs the question, why isn't there a simple "Right-Click > create new Live Tile" option at the ugly new start menu/screen.

Also, I'd like to point out that I really don't care if your 8 year old figured it out. Doesn't make legos a viable computing platform. You did touch on a point I made further down. When you ran into a problem with Linux, you easily found the solution because a lot of enthusiasts use Linux, and work through similar issues. I can't see that type of ecosystem developing for Windows8.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[Fjandr]

To be fair (and I've used Win8 and thoroughly dislike it), TrancePhreak said people they've seen, not people in general.

Personal anecdotes don't need citations.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[jp10558]

I suppose that depends on what you think an OS should be, but I personally think most people use any OS to run applications (i.e. most of the time aren't and do not want to be using the OS, but using the applications they need). Not that I'm defending Microsoft or whoever for Windows 8 or iOS etc, but I'm an IT Pro, and I only "use an OS" for configuration of whats needed to do a task, whether it's running a web browser or web server etc. . .

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[jwhitener]

It isn't that different than win 7 imo. I just stay in desktop mode, and largely ignore the other new tablet oriented features. I haven't missed the start menu much either. Windows key + first few letters of the app I want, hit enter, done.

Some things are annoying though. For example, It takes too many clicks to reboot, but I rarely do that anyways. And the control panel navigation is confusing until you get used to it.

Re:Wish I had a mod point for you.

[TrancePhreak]

Something you might not notice initially, but is a welcome fix is that games like StarCraft (the first one) run without as many issues in Windows 8. In Windows 7 there are all sorts of problems with the graphics, partly I hear because of explorer.exe taking over the palette.

More info

[Charliemopps]

This could, potentially, be a very big deal. But we need more info:
Price point?
Does it do media?
Can we modify the OS?
Will it come with a decent solution to the "Keyboards from the couch suck" problem?

I have a lot of hope here for Valve, so I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Re:More info

[GigaBurglar]

It's Linux - you can do anything you want with it.. I would hazard a guess and put it in the same category as Android in contrast to a proprietary platform.

Re:Maybe

[MuH4hA]

I can assure you: that's still how it is. You install the appropriate version of the library - et voilà, it works!

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[cervesaebraciator]

Seriously, I'd like the /. feedback on this... haven't all real linux users abandoned *buntu since a year or 2 back?

Well, first of all, they're going to derive their distro from Ubuntu. This is sort of like Mint which I, a former Ubuntu user, currently run. I would guess that much of what has frustrated Ubuntu users will be excluded and replaced with custom, in-house frustrations. Secondly, "all real linux users"? I'm afraid I don't know what you mean. A Linux user, by definition, is a person who uses Linux. Ubuntu is a Linux distribution. Therefore, a person who uses Ubuntu is also a Linux user. There is no place for "real" qualifiers to enter this any more than someone can be a "real bachelor" or a "true Scotsman". To count oneself a real Linux user and to deny that to others who happen to use a distro one doesn't like is just self-indulgent.

Indrema

[jlebrech]

Looks like Steam are finally building the Indrema.

Re:Maybe

[Kjella]

Most (as in 99.9%) updates I install work without any sort of configuration changes needed, and as an additional nice point, don't require a reboot (usually only kernel updates need a reboot in Linux).

I've never had the kernel go down, but I've been forced to kill the X server quite a few times and early KDE4 made unrecoverable barfs on top of X a few times too. So as a server sure it can have years of uptime, but as a desktop it doesn't really live up to its reputation. That it doesn't go down for planned updates is nice but the unplanned are the worst anyway and the difference between a reboot and and X reset is minimal to a desktop.

Re:Grammar suggestion

[psnyder]

Actually the grammar in the summary is technically not correct.
An adverb should not be placed between the verb it is modifying, and the direct object.

The sentence could be corrected by moving "necessary" after the direct object:
"...a game console that will make their own Linux-based software platform necessary,"


(This assumes the term "correct grammar" is defined as a description of how most native speakers speak, rather than a prescription of rules to make oneself understood.)

Re:also windows drivers and windows wrapped driver

[ciderbrew]

If valve start to make a fortune in the venture, or one company can demonstrate that cash can be made, I'm sure (hope) that will start to get better.

Re:Maybe

[TheDarkMaster]

Well ... I consider a problem the need of having to rebuild the desktop (if it does work, since usually compiling something big is a hell) to get things back up and running. You do not see the problem because you're used to doing so, but ask the same thing for the average user to see what happens.

Re:Maybe

[TheDarkMaster]

I do not feed trolls, sorry :-)

Re:Maybe

[ciderbrew]

If you can get that to read - "I can assure you: it works!" no matter the user skill level. You're onto a winner.

Re:Maybe

[TheDarkMaster]

Try to install a new X server from source, or try to update some relevant library (to be able to use shiny new application with obscure or alpha dependencies), and you will see the problem that I are talking about. The kernel Linux is stable, but the software needed to make the desktop work are incomplete, inconsistent or simply broken.

In theory...

[Type44Q]

which looks like their first-generation operating system will be derived from Ubuntu 12.04.2 LTS

In theory, this means support for Radeon 2000 through 4000 GPU's if they stick with X.Org 1.12 (AMD refuses to support those GPU's - not all of which can be considered dated in the least - in 12.10/X.org 1.13).

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[Hatta]

Well, first of all, they're going to derive their distro from Ubuntu

Which means it's going to be even further from base Debian. Which emphasizes OP's point, wtf is wrong with Debian?

Yeah but..

[GigaBurglar]

What use is the platform when there are literally no games to play on it? Team Fortress Two and Half Life - spoilt for choices..

Re:Yeah but..

[ciderbrew]

I'm not too sure but I think they'll be able to make some games for it. Half-life 4&5 only on Valve's new platform would work for most I think. the entry cost for a free OS isn't too hard to get around.

Re:Yeah but..

[TheDarkMaster]

Think the work needed to port a game made to use DirectX (and heavily) to now use OpenGL or something like that. In many cases is simply impossible without rewriting everything from scratch.

Re:Maybe

[Microlith]

Try to install a new X server from source, or try to update some relevant library (to be able to use shiny new application with obscure or alpha dependencies), and you will see the problem that I are talking about.

Wait, when is a user of Ubuntu, particularly a non-technical user, ever going to do that?

The kernel Linux is stable, but the software needed to make the desktop work are incomplete, inconsistent or simply broken.

Your arguments are more incomplete, inconsistent, or simply broken than the platform you're trying to attack is.

Re:Finally

[GigaBurglar]

What planet do you live on mate?? You do realise that Linux is the number one server platform, it's the number one mobile platform, embedded platform, in all respects, except the desktop, it's the largest platform on the planet. That being said - Windows 8 is digging it's own grave. Windows has progressively gotten worse since Vista, 7 was okay, 8 is just.. meh.. Linux Mint or Ubuntu is actually EASIER to use than Windows - to give an example.. my brother, who has never used a computer in his life, has been happily using Ubuntu for about a year now - no problems.. he actually prefers it to Windows. It only tends to be technophobes that are scared of a headless platform like Ubuntu.

Also I am not sure it will work so well

[Sycraft-fu]

We'll actually get to see a bit in a year or so, as there are some bigger games coming to Linux. A few Kickstarter titles have pledged Linux support as there were some vocal calls for it from backers.

I think though that Linux users are going to be a little disappointed with the results. The graphics driver situation with regards to hardware OpenGL support is pretty bad in Linux. The only driver that seems to support current features, in hardware, without blowing up is the binary nVidia driver.

So the games may well came to Linux, but only run if you have an nVidia card and if you load the binary driver. That is not likely to please the Linux community at large, but there may be no real other option. It is one thing to do a game with fairly simplistic graphics (rendering wise) that just uses SDL or something, it is quite another to make a game that uses current 3D hardware features.

Now a dedicated set of hardware/software like a defined "Steam Box" could solve that of course... But then that's not really gaming for Linux, that's a videogame console that happens to run Linux.

Re:Steam Linux

[ciderbrew]

You can't buy a laptop in a chain store that isn't Windows 8 in the UK. Popular may not mean popular.

Question from a Linux noob

[GoodNewsJimDotCom]

Is there a distribution that has its own binary format? I ran Linux back in 2003 with Mandrake/KDE, and it seemed fine except it didn't have the ability to download executables off the Internet and run them. With the superior security of Linux, system files can't be modified without a root password typed in by the user. So while Windows can get hosed by running a binary, Linux is basically immune to viruses. I would constantly struggle compiling and installing software enough that it was a big headache. I think if there was a binary format for one or all Linux, then it would be something I would be interested in using again. I also thing the advantages of not being gun shy about downloading random executables from the Internet, would lead me to like Linux even more than Windows.

Re:Question from a Linux noob

[Microlith]

I ran Linux back in 2003 with Mandrake/KDE

Well, ten years is a lot of time. Perhaps you should grab a distro and try it out?

Is there a distribution that has its own binary format?

No, all executable binaries and libraries are ELF.

it seemed fine except it didn't have the ability to download executables off the Internet and run them

Well, no. Linux doesn't behave like Windows.

Linux is basically immune to viruses.

Viruses are not what you should be concerned about. Trojans and other such packages are a problem and Linux is not immune.

I would constantly struggle compiling and installing software enough that it was a big headache.

That's what package managers are for.

I also thing the advantages of not being gun shy about downloading random executables from the Internet, would lead me to like Linux even more than Windows.

No, downloading and running random executables is foolish in the extreme, regardless of OS.

Re:Question from a Linux noob

[Rich0]

The other post hit most of the points, but regarding software compatibility.

As long as the game is static-compiled as one big binary then for the most part you can just download, chmod, and run it. It won't be able to modify /bin/bash, but it sure can read your firefox password store and upload it to who-knows-where. It will also eat gobs of RAM, and if glibc was statically linked then it will be sensitive to any system call changes.

As soon as the game is dynamically linked, then it starts becoming distro-specific. To run a dynamically linked program you need appropriate versions of all the libraries it references installed.

Windows games tend to be linked against DLLs that they bundle, except for some commonly-used ones which are often system-wide. That tends to waste some RAM, and it tends to mean that you're at the mercy of the publisher to fix security issues.

In the Linux world it is preferred to get software from the distro, which results in less RAM use as everything is built against the same set of libraries (which means they're resident in RAM once only), and the next time zlib has a security problem you just fix that one library file and every application which uses it is fixed.

Re:Question from a Linux noob

[GoodNewsJimDotCom]

Thank you for your reply, I only have a comment for one thing. > No, downloading and running random executables is foolish in the extreme, regardless of OS.

This is something I think could change. Commodore 64 would always boot up the same way no matter what software you ran on it the last time you ran on it last time. I think it would be feasible to do this with a modern OS as well. Simply have a certain part of the OS offlimits for writing, and things could only start on bootup with user permission. Also safe mode would allow you to unload start on bootup options. Finally there would be limited interaction between files of different directories where they were installed. Like a communication protocol for communication between programs. No messy registry, but everything is contained in the installation directory, so if you delete that directory, the program is uninstalled.

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[pavon]

Ubuntu makes it easier to use proprietary drivers, and Valve probably rightly assumes that most people that want to play proprietary games through a proprietary DRM-lite storefront will want this. Don't know if that outweighs all the other downsides to Ubuntu but it's something.

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[Guspaz]

by 'real' I mean people who actually know what a kernel is vs those that don't...

This elitist attitude is damaging to Linux. Users who don't know what a kernel is would normally be called a typical user. If anything, people who know what a kernel is aren't "real" users in that they don't represent the vast overwhelming majority of computer users.

Realistic response

[TheDarkMaster]

1) The hardware is open so that you can (if you wish) put a different Linux distribution on it.

2) If the Steam Box software works on any distribution you so install.

3) The games are protected only by Steam's own DRM and not encumbered by anything more onerous.

4) All games use the controller. The keyboard and mouse can be an option, but it should not be the only option.

I know this makes it nothing more than a nice small form factor PC with a standard spec. I'm happy for it to be exactly that.

1) Why? Most users will see the box as "yet another console", if you need a PC... well... Buy a PC?

2) theoretically possible, but in practice impossible. Few developers have the resources to make the software compatible with the 2^n existing Linux distros, and would be enough one of them to change anything to throw out this work.

3) Possible

4) Well, is a "console" so I think that all games will use joystick by default as on any other console. And yes, it would be useful to have the option to use keyboard and mouse (Gears of War with joystick? ARGH!)

Re:Realistic response

[Soluzar]

Let me answer the one actual question you posed to me, in your response to my first point. You asked "why", and the answer is quite simple.

For some time now I've been somewhat in the market for a small form factor PC to use with my TV. I've not got around to choosing one yet, because it's not the highest of priorities. Ideally I'd like something that vaguely resembles a games console, but is in fact a full-fledged PC.

I want to play some games on it, but I also would like to use it for other things like media playback. I'd like to be able to install games from other sources than Steam too, so openness is an issue.

Why I asked about other distributions is simply because I have a distaste for Ubuntu Linux.

The Steam box seems as though it has a chance of fitting these specifications pretty well. If I "bought a PC" I'd likely get something that doesn't resemble just another set top box. That would be fine, but not ideal. Also, I'm (unlike a lot of PC users) quite happy to have someone else pick my hardware configuration for me, as long as they pick one that works well.

Re:Grammar suggestion

[Anonymous Coward]

Necessary is not an adverb, nor is it incorrectly trying to function as an adverb. The informal explanation is that it is an adjective, and sometimes they can go between a transitive verb and its direct object -- this is probably how it would be explained (if at all) in primary or secondary school. More formally, "necessary" here functions as a verbal particle and "make necessary" as a phrasal verb, and both the original version and your version of the sentence are correct. You can read about phrasal verbs here if you're particularly interested.

Re:Hmmm ...

[Microlith]

And how long will it take before people are suing Valve for the updates they'll have made for their distribution?

Suing? I expect Valve is more knowledgeable about the GPL and needing to be compliant than most.

I find it unlikely they'll be putting a vanilla install of Livelink on it, and I'm skeptical they'd be willing to give back any changes they made.

First, what is Livelink? Second, what makes you think they wouldn't?

Which means this is on a collision course with the GPL in all likelihood.

I love unsubstantiated claims!

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[Hatta]

How can it be easier than 'apt-get install nvidia-glx'?

Agreed

[phorm]

What's especially bad is the time it's taking even the "Valve" games to come to Linux. Platform support isn't very useful without product.

If they'd at least migrated a few more of their own titles (Left 4 Dead 1/2, Half Life 2, etc), it would be more viable. Hell, basically all you can play is the original CS and TF2... not even newer CS:GO.

Re:Hmmm ...

[gstoddart]

Suing? I expect Valve is more knowledgeable about the GPL and needing to be compliant than most.

But are they likely to?

First, what is Livelink? Second, what makes you think they wouldn't?

Doh, I meant to type Linux. Livelink is ECM software, and I type it more often than Linux.

What makes me think they wouldn't? Large amounts of companies who make closed products using GPL software and then claim they can't release their proprietary changes and the fact that I think companies will usually try sneak around it as opposed to obeying it.

I love unsubstantiated claims!

You must, you just made two of them ... your first and last sentences.

Controllers....

[PrimalChrome]

It is possible.

But you will see the same thing happen as when Unreal had a console release capable of using keyboard/mouse. The controller monkeys were crushed. You have no fine granular input with a controller. You have a very limited number of executions with a controller whereas with a kbd/mouse your actions per second are MUCH higher.

Re:Controllers....

[CronoCloud]

But you will see the same thing happen as when Unreal had a console release capable of using keyboard/mouse.

Was I not referring to RTS's rather than FPS's? Why bring the old FPS arguments into it.

You have no fine granular input with a controller.

You don't? Could have fooled me. Besides in an RTS it's isn't ZAbout fine control it's about lassoing and general pointing. You don't need to click on some enemies 2 pixel head from a mile away, you just need to point your tanks/APC's at a general target.

You have a very limited number of executions with a controller

Not really all that limited, two analog sticks, 4 shoulder buttons, 4 face buttons, select and start, plust the d-pad can be u sed for more buttons as well as L3 and R3. That's a lot of buttons. Start using them in combinations and that's even more functions.

whereas with a kbd/mouse your actions per second are MUCH higher.

Really? Do you know how fast those buttons can be pressed on that control pad, very very quickly.Though it would depend on the UI.

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[Rich0]

This elitist attitude is damaging to Linux.

Define "damaging."

If it means it will prevent mass adoption, sure. If it means that Linux will die, then no - that attitude has been around for decades and it hasn't died yet.

If anything, people who know what a kernel is aren't "real" users in that they don't represent the vast overwhelming majority of computer users.

They represent me though, which is all I really care about. I don't contribute to FOSS so that somebody's grandma can use it. I mean, sure, I'm happy if they can and all, but that isn't really the reason I do it. I contribute to FOSS because I find it useful and would like to make it more useful. That generally means that I'm helping to make it more useful for others like me.

Now, the reason Canonical contributes to Linux is that they want to obtain a commercial return. They're not going to get that return by catering to users who are already catered to by Linux. Their target is the grandma most of the established Linux crowd doesn't care about. Their efforts to make Ubuntu more widely accepted are likely to lose their existing user base. From their standpoint it doesn't matter - if they lose a few thousand users to gain millions it is a good commercial trade. However, this is why they get so many complaints on forums like this one.

So, do I want to see Linux succeed? Well, that's a trick question, because as far as I'm concerned it already has.

Oh, and we're using Linux in the context of the traditional Linux distro. If you're talking about Linux the kernel, well, it already is adopted. Chances are it is running on your DVR, car entertainment system, phone, etc already.

Re:Finally

[JustNiz]

I think you totally missed his point.
He's not even slightly arguing that Linux isn't ubiquitous.
He's saying that the only remaining legitimate excuse to have a Windows partition at all is gaming.
  A point I for one very much agree with.
I can't wait for the day when its the norm for premium games to be available as native Linux versions.

Re:Finally

[JustNiz]

Please ignore my earlier response. my browser seemed to have f*'d up making me think you were responding to another thread.

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[VGPowerlord]

Which means it's going to be even further from base Debian. Which emphasizes OP's point, wtf is wrong with Debian?

Debian Stable is over two years old at the moment and tends to be outdated even when it is brand new.

Re:Finally

[JustNiz]

>> Windows on the other hand offers everything

You seem to be incorrectly crediting Microsoft for the games available for their platform, when that is a decision made by the games developers.

>> and the OS is pretty damn user friendly compared to linux.

Not in my opinion. Its usually damned hard to make Windows behave and do exactly what I ask, both because it keeps trying to second-guess and overrule what I'm telling it to do, and also because the user-interface completely hides the systems internals. In the rare cases where it doesn't, it just uses at best vague, wooly or otherwise non-standard terminology. e.g. "A system error has occurred".

Its nearly always far more trivial to do stuff with Linux. IMHO Windows is (still) a toy OS by comparison to Linux.

Re:Maybe

[AlphaWolf_HK]

How come something like ksplice hasn't gone mainstream to solve that last problem?

Re:Maybe

[Real1tyCzech]

Seriously?

Have you used Linux since 1995?

No...really.

Package/dependency management has been around for well over a decade now and takes care of *all* but the worst "not ready for prime time" applications/functionality still in development.

"install a new X server from source"

You're kidding, right? Who in their right minds would even attempt such a thing on a modern distribution of Linux? Are you high??

Re:Maybe

[AlphaWolf_HK]

I don't think he's trying to attack it, rather he's explaining the shortcomings. For the most part I agree - the thing I hate the most about using linux is the entire X infrastructure. Everything else about linux is done beautifully.

Most of what I do therefore is at the command line. When I make changes to my servers, I almost never do anything involving X, even if doing so would be more efficient.

Re:Maybe

[EvanED]

...and as an additional nice point, don't require a reboot (usually only kernel updates need a reboot in Linux)

Eh, my informal impression from being a partially-Ubuntu user for a bit now is that, at least with Ubuntu, reboot-requiring updates actually come about as often (maybe even a little more often) than they do on Windows. I tried tracking this for a little bit of time but for a couple reasons I wasn't diligent enough about checking for updates, and reboot-required updates come by infrequently enough that it'd take a few months of observation to get a decent answer.

Other distros of course don't require updates nearly as often, but (1) as Ubuntu is probably the most popular distro especially for non-technical and first-time users, that's what most of them are going to see, and (2) it would make me wonder, if I was using another distro, whether I should be updating anyway even though the distro wasn't pushing it.

Re:Ooooh, maybe I can run the distribution on my P

[Dr_Barnowl]

Steam for Linux is x86 (32 bit) - probably mostly because the Ubuntu download page still recommends that people download and install the 32-bit version.

And to be fair, it's still a good choice - the kernel has PAE support built in by default, so you can address all your RAM even if you have > 4GB. And most people don't have a need to run a single process that addresses more than 4GB of space - even modern games.

It's not the BEST choice, because the 64-bit instruction set probably improves some high-performance programs (like modern games). But most of the games I see on Windows are 32-bit executables anyway, presumably because the developer or publisher doesn't want to invest in multi-platform quality control for the sake of the small number of customers who would benefit.

Re:Maybe

[NotBorg]

It's so much easier to install Windows or MacOS from source.

Re:Maybe

[NotBorg]

Probably because it's a lot of work to maintain the underlying $ervice$.

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[Guspaz]

Linux on the desktop, specifically, yes. In an embedded fashion it's already ubiquitous. I would bet that almost everybody has at least one Linux device in their home/possession whether they know it or not. For example, the ADSL/VDSL/FTTH modems that Bell Canada hands out to all their customers runs Linux.

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[professionalfurryele]

I'm running a custom kernel on my netbook because the integrated graphics on the shitty motherboard wasn't supported by the version in the then contemporary version of Ubuntu (or Mint, or a couple of other distros I was looking at). I know what a kernel is. I still run Ubuntu. I will probably switch my personal machines over to Mint next time I decide I want a change, but most of the time Ubuntu just works and the forums are useful and friendly. Probably because they aren't populated by people who don't consider someone who doesn't know what a kernel is a 'real' user.

Re:Maybe

[Microlith]

Ksplice is mostly of use (almost exclusively of use) in mission critical environments where the downtime to reboot into a fixed kernel alone is unacceptable. It also only covers the kernel, and not anything else.

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[ardor]

How can it be easier than 'apt-get install nvidia-glx'?

A preinstalled driver, where you don't have to type in *anything*.

Re:Maybe

[TheSpoom]

Ubuntu was probably downloading new kernels. Kernel development proceeds at a fairly fast pace, but a lot of times it's not strictly necessary to update them. I haven't used Ubuntu in a while but if it's like it was when I was using it, another advantage is that you're never *forced* to reboot after a set amount of time as you are by default in Windows. (Yes, I know this can be configured away with registry editing and whatnot, but it's not the default or even easy.)

Re:Maybe

[TheSpoom]

Try to install a new X server from source

Who really installs X from source? I mean, Gentoo users, but they're used to it and it's handled by a central package and dependency management system, so it's very unlikely that the build will break. Everybody else (the vast majority) uses binary packages.

or try to update some relevant library (to be able to use shiny new application with obscure or alpha dependencies)

Libraries that get into the standard Debian / Ubuntu repos have been tested and retested. They're not "alpha". If you choose to install an alpha / beta / untested library, you get what you requested, which is potentially unstable code. This is not any different from other architectures like Windows or OS X.

The kernel Linux is stable, but the software needed to make the desktop work are incomplete, inconsistent or simply broken.

I am posting this from a stable Linux desktop system that sees daily use and has for more than a year. Ergo, you are wrong. QED.

Re:Maybe

[TheSpoom]

How come something like ksplice hasn't gone mainstream to solve that last problem?

A bunch of legalities centering around Red Hat's control of the platform. Essentially, Ksplice isn't really free.

Re:Maybe

[EvanED]

Ubuntu was probably downloading new kernels.

It was, and that's my guess as well. However, I don't know this for sure... for instance, I can imagine that they'd take a conservative approach and update if there was some X or Unity update as well, and there's not an indication in the update list as to which particular updates require a reboot. Heck, I think it doesn't even tell you in aggregate ("installing the selected updates will require a reboot") until after it's done. (In 12.10 it doesn't even show you the list of updates by default!) So I'm basically in the same situation as in Windows: do the update, then if it says "reboot", try to do it ASAP in case not doing so could cause something to go haywire.

(Is it likely to go haywire? No. Could it? Yes, theoretically. Not having audited the code for everything being updated, I can't say for certain.)

(Yes, I know this can be configured away with registry editing and whatnot, but it's not the default or even easy.)

If you just want to do it on a per-update basis, there's no registry editing necessary; you just have to stop the Windows Update service. Heck, you can probably do it with a net stop command from the command line.

But yes, even though I would characterize it as "small", it's a benefit nonetheless.

Re:Maybe

[TheDarkMaster]

Package/dependency management has been around for well over a decade now and takes care of *all* but the worst "not ready for prime time" applications/functionality still in development.

Yep, but still do not work so well in many cases. f you do not believe me, try removing some packages that apparently are not needed as I did, and have the package system asking if I want to remove half the desktop together.

You're kidding, right? Who in their right minds would even attempt such a thing on a modern distribution of Linux? Are you high??

No, I'm just following the Linux spirit "solve the problem yourself" when you can not find a ready-made solution. Funny you think tha is madness the one thing that is usually the only thing to be done.

Re:Maybe

[EvanED]

However, I don't know this for sure... for instance, I can imagine that they'd take a conservative approach and update if there was some X or Unity update as well

That should have said "and reboot if there was some X or unity update".

Re:Maybe

[TheDarkMaster]

I am posting this from a stable Linux desktop system that sees daily use and has for more than a year. Ergo, you are wrong. QED.

"If it works for me then have to work for everyone"... It is this way of thinking that makes the desktop linux the problem it is today. My desktop - today - is reasonably stable but I had to spend weeks researching to get it. Now put a normal user (the average Joe) having to do the same thing, and you will understand why only 5% of desktops use Linux.

Re:Maybe

[TheDarkMaster]

Looks like I hurt the dogmas of some fanatics :-)

Re:Autoupdate

[HiThere]

That is a terrible script to use on a testing machine. It isn't that infrequent for testing debs to not have a full list of ever dependency, so autoclean can break your system.

On a stabe repository, though, it should work fine. (But I prefer to use "apt-get dist-upgrade" and look things over before I decide to proceed.)

Re:Maybe

[TheDarkMaster]

Oh .. I hurt your fragile feelings? I ask a thousand excuses, seriously! :-))

PS: No, I am a Slackware user (from 1999 to today), and now Linux Mint user too. Try again, is funny

Re:Maybe

[TheSpoom]

Is it likely to go haywire?

Very much no. I don't remember the last time I came across non-kernel software that required a reboot immediately to work. Obviously, new drivers and whatnot will not work until you reboot, but the old versions will remain in memory and in-use until you do if they can't be used immediately.

Heck, I think it doesn't even tell you in aggregate ("installing the selected updates will require a reboot") until after it's done.

I'm not sure of this but the last time I remember using Ubuntu, I believe it did tell you on the update list prior to installation. I could be wrong.

you just have to stop the Windows Update service

That's kind of a sledgehammer-to-kill-an-ant approach. It's indicative of what I perceived as a larger problem; I often found that Windows was an adversary with things like this, where you had to work around it to get it to do what you want. Linux typically works with you.

Re:Maybe

[TheSpoom]

"If it works for me then have to work for everyone"... It is this way of thinking that makes the desktop linux the problem it is today.

Nowhere have I indicated this. Your claim was the following: "The kernel Linux is stable, but the software needed to make the desktop work are incomplete, inconsistent or simply broken." One working instance is a rebuttal of that claim (notwithstanding the fact that I have used many different distros on a wide variety of hardware). Furthermore, I know for a fact that the default Ubuntu install works fine with few changes. It may not be what you personally would like, and it may not have the latest software, but that's the trade-off they make for stability.

My desktop - today - is reasonably stable but I had to spend weeks researching to get it. Now put a normal user (the average Joe) having to do the same thing, and you will understand why only 5% of desktops use Linux.

I installed Ubuntu on my very much tech-phobic uncle's computer, dual-booted to his existing Windows installation. I have not had to fix anything on the Ubuntu side in over two years. If your next claim is that it's only that way because I installed it, I would ask whether your theoretical user installed Windows from scratch on their system. My thinking would be no. If they can install Windows, they're not an average user, and with current install processes for modern Linux distributions, they could certainly install Linux.

If you're going to argue about an installed Linux vs. a preinstalled Windows system, complete with drivers, you're arguing an apples-to-oranges comparison. Find a desktop system with preinstalled Linux (they do exist, despite Microsoft's stranglehold on the OEM market). My guess is that such a system would be far more stable than an equivalent Windows system.

I'm starting to think some of you guys are astroturfing here, but whatever, I'm open to debate.

Re:Maybe

[TheDarkMaster]

"I am posting this from a stable Linux desktop system that sees daily use and has for more than a year. Ergo, you are wrong. QED."

Here for you. One working system in thousands is not "works for everyone", is "works for me", then my said. And maybe I missed the important part: The "working" part is not "I can get video and a wallpaper", is "desktop working good or better than the market leader". Examples? ctrl+c/ctrl+v, never worked well here, in 14 years (works in some applications, have strange behavior in anothers, or are broken).

Another one? behavior/appearance. In appearance/behavior QT applications are good, GNOME applications more or less, each application look different and they should have the same appearance and behavior in their common functions. Try pgAdmin3? He uses another GUI toolkit, and a bizarre one (and full of bugs), if you try another one he uses GTK1 (and have a grotesque appearance). See now what are the problems?

Re:Maybe

[Soluzar]

Actually I'm not used to doing so. I've not been a regular user of Linux for quite some time. You're still correct to say that I don't see it as a problem, while some people might. Those people might well be under a misapprehension about how hard the process actually is though.

Re:Maybe

[EvanED]

Very much no. I don't remember the last time I came across non-kernel software that required a reboot immediately to work. Obviously, new drivers and whatnot will not work until you reboot, but the old versions will remain in memory and in-use until you do if they can't be used immediately.

I'm not really worried about whether I'll get the new version; that's fine. What I'm worried about is that some file Foo which is not being used at the time of the update will be changed, and then after the update the old version of the program which is still running will go and open Foo, and because of a version mismatch, bad things will happen.

Is it likely to happen? No. Is it theoretically possible it could? Absolutely.

(And for the record, I've also run Windows for some time after completing an update without restarting, and haven't really hit any problems because of it as far as I know. So Windows and Linux in that scenario are really not all that different.)

I'm not sure of this but the last time I remember using Ubuntu, I believe it did tell you on the update list prior to installation. I could be wrong.

Well, I could be wrong too. :-) I did try it before posting, but the current batch of things I needed didn't require an update so it wasn't a good test. I'll keep an eye out.

Gnome was briefly controlled by Pro-MS Novell

[leftie]

A lot of the Gnome mistakes happened during brief window Novell had a lot of influence on Gnome development at the time Novell was trying to kiss up to Microsoft. Novell got bought out since then and SUSE is running it own ship again.

Re:Maybe

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Why would that be the case today? A lot of newer implementations are being virtualized, so you could simply clone the guest, patch the clone, and do a live swap at layer 2 once the patched server has booted. That also mitigates the chance that the patch breaks something, in which case you simply put the unlatched system back in place.

Re:Maybe

[higuita]

this is FUD!

No one in current times, unless its a developer or a gentoo user, will compile X from source

Only a windows user would think that mixing libraries is a good idea to put a program to work, its the fastest way to break a system. Only advanced and knowledge users should try it and only for a very good reason (like trying to support a closed source app... if you have the source, its probably easier and safer to recompile)

Every distro have some form of beta, latest, unstable, -current, etc version, where you have even more update apps if you want. many have external repositories and ftp servers where you can get updated versions, compiled for your system... so even if someone wants a newer version of something, all it needs to know is to use google and read.

lastly there are software that needs to be fine tuned, but no OS is perfect. Windows require huge amount of extra software to be useful and is lacking in many places, MacOSX break many things, lacks others and is not as flexible, linux have incomplete features in some places. Now all depends what you need, what you use, need or not need. The good new is that linux advance faster than the other OS, so one problem for one user last year might have disappeared already today.

Re:Maybe

[TheDarkMaster]

FUD? Not so fast.

First, I thought that part of linux philosophy was the ability to be able to compile the program from source code. When was it changed and no one warned me? Usually the package works, the problem is when it does not work (yep, happens) or the packaged version is too old and my last resort is compile myself.

Second, your distro maybe do not have repositories (hello, Slackware user here) or the packages are the wrong version or more common, incompatible for some obscure reason (i cannot install application "X" because the packaging system refuses to install the "Y" libs, even "Y" libs can be installed side by side with the current "Z" lib).

At last, the problem is not exactly the OS (ie, the kernel), but the desktop, the application set (and interaction with the OS) that makes it work. As I wrote in another comment, today - since before 2000 - the copy / paste still does not work consistently across desktop applications, is a "hit-and-miss" game where some applications works well, some have strange behavior and another one simply have exclusive (and bizarre) ideas about what a "copy/paste" means.

In short, it's like I was in fact running multiple, distinct and mutually incompatible desktops simultaneously on the same monitor.

Re:Maybe

[Kirth]

As desktop, Linux still sucks

Well, I've been using it since 1996, and at that time it was better than this Windows 95 (Or MacOS 8 or OS/2).

Windows have serious security problems, etc etc but it does not break the existing applications on each relevant update

It does not? Well, my experience is somewhat limited to wine, but as far as I can see, those pesky needed add-ons like DirectX, PhysX, and especially .NET or GFWL break applications all the time. I've got a lot of broken Windows applications (which worked at some point) due to some add-on library update by another application.

And in my experience, Linux breaks a lot less upon upgrades. Not the least because it has a package management.

Re:please, whynot a simple debian base, *buntu fub

[unixisc]

I actually think Steam would have done better making PC-BSD the basis for their platform. It's a lot more stable and less likely to change over time.

Also, I was curious as to why they had to come up w/ their own Linux distro, instead of make a game platform that would be available in .rpm, .deb, .pac and so on? That way, they can install on anything and be available for most of the Linux user base.

Re:Debian? EWWWWW...

[Sigg3.net]

He's a time traveller, you insensitive clod!

Re:Maybe

[Sigg3.net]

Not to mention that Gnome or Unity (two different things IMHO) aren't the only desktops out there. Most distros include other desktops or tutorials are readily available.

Windows works like an old donkey, dragging its feet and complaining, right out of the box. But there is no way to fix it or ensure against the registry slowdown.

Linux will in some cases require editing a few settings in a .conf (text) file once, and adding restricted/proprietaty stuff once, but usually just works right out of the box. And there's always a way to fix it when you've screwed up.

I call BS on GP. You're just too lazy to learn something different.

Re:Maybe

[higuita]

yes, FUD ! trying to show the worst case possible as a normal, everyday thing is FUD.

1- you CAN compile anything... but that doesn't mean that anyone must do it. Again, only people that really want to do it (developers and gentoo users) will ever do it. Most ubuntu users dont even know what compile is and they use a linux system just fine.

2- a) i'm a slackware user since 1995 and slackware DO have repositories! You have the main ftp for distro packages, you have alienbob packages, you have the slacky repository, rlworkman repository, linuxpackages.net and finally, the slackbuilds repository, where you have build scripts for many softwares (but yes, you can still compile manually if you like!)
  b) if you have a package that need a different lib version that you are using, then you are doing it wrong! binary packages are build for one distro/version, should be used on that distro/version. Trying to mix distros or version packages is a great way to have a broken system. Please note that i'm not saying that it doesn't work, most of the time it works fine, but one should ALWAYS prefer distro+correct version packages, and if not available, a source compiled. The above repositories for slackware have many programs compiled for the correct slackaware versions and if not, have the slackbuild ready to quickly compile things.
Downloading a random binary from the internet and trying to use it on a random distro is the "windows way", not the "linux way".
ps: if you are talking about gnome, forget it, that is a dependency hell... on slackware you need to use a gnome repository (like GSB or dropline) to have matching libs. For other distros its the same thing... binary packages build for set of libraries. NO MIXING... if you mix versions, its a user problem, not distro nor linux problem

3- Linux have 2 "clipboards", that work in different ways... if you dont understand then, its better to install some clipboard management, like klipper, glipper, parcellite, etc and enable the clipboards sync. It will make copy&paste more useful and consistent, specially for windows users. If you are talking about feel and use consistency, try to use the same platform for all apps (kde, gnome, xfce, etc), but as linux have more GUI libraries and no central management, the GUI is more fragment than on windows and mac... but those systems also have different GUI frameworks and so, the exact same problem . For some people that is a problem, for others is a good (promotes competition)

Re:Maybe

[TheSpoom]

There's no such thing as Unity. I have retconned it from my universe. LALALALALA